Are you really that powerless to the point of being paralyzed and not being able to vote with your wallet?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Writes Letter to U.S. Senate Supporting Strong Privacy Legislation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you really that powerless to the point of being paralyzed and not being able to vote with your wallet?
Well, sorta, sorta not.
iCloud data security overview - Apple Support
iCloud uses strong security methods, employs strict policies to protect your information, and leads the industry in using privacy-preserving security technologies like end-to-end encryption for your data.
And in those cases where iCloud is not E2E encrypted does the buzzword "end to end" actually mean anything there. If I'm storing data on Apple's servers does the concept of E2E even make sense? If I encrypt something on my device, store it there, and then decrypt it with Apple never getting the keys I guess that's end to end because Apple can't see it, right?
It's a bit concerning to me that they've stopped short of being clear on what's really going on with this.
An internal struggle could be going on or perhaps they're working on a revamped version. It being fully scrapped isn't the only possibility.
I hear you, but the one thing Apple is _really_ bad at is admitting they screwed up and misjudged the customer. ("You're holding it wrong.") Something stagnant at Apple (and most tech companies) _usually_ means it's dead.
My opinion as a dev that's worked on security projects: if I got that kind of community feedback from what I was gonna ship I'd want off that project so fast. And I know Apple's devs read these forums.
That said, I don't know for sure either. But I feel pretty confident it isn't coming back. It's a salvage job for what useful tech they can pull out of it now.
This has not happened. They can be subpoenaed for iCloud data (the parts they can decrypt), of course.
CSAM scanning is not for the device, but for iCloud Photo Library. It was also suspended, and not implemented, in case you missed it.
See above.
No user data is sold by making the worlds most powerful search engine default. You can change the default at any time, before you ever make a search.
Well, many important parts are actually E2E encrypted. It would be nice to have at least an option to include some of the rest, definitely.
Well, seeing that legislation is likely to pass that prevents App Store exclusivity, this is actually a great solution to overcome the objections. Now let's have 1) strict enforcement, 2) developer bonding, 3) financial recovery and payment to consumers for violations, 4) jail time for perps 5) treatment of violations as a crime with funded enforcers.
This could be great. See ya in jail Zuck!
This could be great. See ya in jail Zuck!
maybe you could read this article you seem to so wrong and yet so adamant about it (isn't that the case for most who are wrong?). https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303
If you have trouble typing a link, here is an excerpt:
End-to-end encryption
For additional privacy and security, many Apple services use end-to-end encryption, which encrypts your information using keys derived from your devices and your device passcode, which only you know. This means that only you can decrypt and access your information, and only on trusted devices where you’re signed in with your Apple ID. No one else, not even Apple, can access your end-to-end encrypted data. End-to-end encryption requires two-factor authentication for your Apple ID and a passcode set on your devices. Some features using end-to-end encryption may require up-to-date software.Not sure where your info comes from (or doesn't), but fact checks work
Except the EU may require it. and the US has been violating our rights by conducting illegal eavesdropping on communications for years. I guess it is a fine line between protecting children and people's lives and keeping privacy rights. Personally, I opt for protection. I do understand that every pedophile out there was alarmed by the proposal
That's only because Apple got caught red-handed trying to sneak it in and when (rightfully) called on it had to circle the wagons and try to gloss over a major major pr blunder.
Timmy loves gaslighting the privacy issue. It's just too bad he doesn't match his actions (China etc) with his rhetoric.
Remind me again, how almost every 3rd party browser, offers better extended privacy tools than your pos browser Tim.
Oh and to all of you, who forget Apple practices easily, upon their first PR blow.
Oh and to all of you, who forget Apple practices easily, upon their first PR blow.
Last edited:
Tim doesnt seem embarrassed at all. Probably laughs at these Macrumors posts, which conflate everything to try and make an insult.
No movement. I posted earlier my thoughts on what it might be but right now it is still a project that is in development for future planning.
That said, when I project sits for a year with no movement at a tech company that usually means it's pretty much dead.
Have you heard something new beyond the 12/15 removal of all mentions of CSAM from their child safety pages?
Apple's CSAM troubles may be back as new law planned - 9to5Mac
Apple's CSAM troubles may be back, after controversy over the issue of scanning iPhones for child sexual abuse materials led to the company.
9to5mac.com
Yep, seems like EU csam troubles.Apple's CSAM troubles may be back as new law planned - 9to5Mac
Apple's CSAM troubles may be back, after controversy over the issue of scanning iPhones for child sexual abuse materials led to the company.
I seem to remember Apple straight up telling the US government to “shove it” after being ordered to create a back door.
www.totaltele.com
9to5mac.com
venturebeat.com
Total Telecom | News, analysis and events for global telecoms
News, analysis and events for global telecoms
www.totaltele.com
Backdoor into iPhones would be required by law in proposed US bill - 9to5Mac
A bill being proposed in the US Senate would effectively make it a legal requirement for Apple to build a backdoor into iPhones. It would...
9to5mac.com
Apple will not build a backdoor to the iPhone, says Tim Cook in response to FBI court order
Want smarter insights in your inbox? Sign up for our weekly newsletters to get only what matters to enterprise AI, data, and security leaders. Subscribe Now Apple CEO Tim Cook has responded to a court order that stipulated Apple must help the FBI break into a phone belonging to one of the San...
I saw that bit but we'll see. The funny thing about that legislation is that Article 10 basically gives tech platforms carte blanche to use whatever tech they see fit. It can almost be a no-op.
And I can't imagine Apple is particularly excited to try and fight the battle for CSAM again in the US so it doesn't make sense for them to push much for this law if they can't make it universal.
Things change, especially in the tech world. You should try to keep up.
So you want Apple to break the law? Then their devices won't be available to anyone in those countries. That's not a privacy or business solution.